Skip to main content

Full text of "Verdict On India"

See other formats

102                                    VERDICT  OX INDIA
an ultimatum to the world, so these same people refuse to take the
open declarations of Congress leaders at their face value. Perhaps
that is because Congress has two voices, one for the East and one
for the West. And the latter is very much the gentler of the two.
Let us amplify this statement that Congress is Fascist *by open
Before me is a book called The Iron Dictator. On the dust cover
is a melodramatic drawing of a ferocious face, twisted into the
sort of grim nee that Mussolini used to affect \\hen he was braying
for the moon. The face is a portrait, and a very good one, of the
book's subject, Sardar Patel.
Patd is the chief party boss of Congress ; he was described by
John Gunther as * Congress's Jim Farley, the ruthless party fixer
and organizer.' This title is proudly quoted by the author, who
amplifies it with a sub-title of his own * Gandhi's Greatest General.5
Maik that word 'General*; it echoes rather strangely in such
close connection with the name of the meek-voiced apostle of
peace. Gandhi—Jim Farley—party bosses—generals... how can
all these gentlemen be in the same boat ? How indeed ? The
fact remains that they are.
The Iron Dictator has had a very wide sale in India ; you see it on
nearly every bookstall. It has frequently been recommended to me
by Congress enthusiasts ; it may be fairly taken as representing
the average C ngress mentality in the same way that Rosenberg's
thtorks are representative of the Xazi 'philosophy.5
We open it and turn to page 93. This contains a description of
how * Gandhi's Greatest General * deals with his political opponents.
It is the fate which awaits all Congress members who do not toe
the line. The enemy* in this case, was an eminent Bombay
minister called Nariman, who was somewhat too 'ideological5 for
PatePs taste. Patel therefore decided that he must be got out of
the way. Says the author with evident approval:
'PatePs system was not based on democracy—it was a reaction
against democracy. Anybody who did not agree with it had to be
eliminated.. .Either one agrees with him and is incorporated in
hk machine or one disagrees with him and is sent to the wall. He
has ruthlessly (but tactfully) eliminated opponents out of his path.'
Ruthlesbncss and tact—where has one heard oi that sinister